Top DAC reviews: What do they even mean?

[Al M.]

The new dCS Varese review in The Absolute Sound,

dCS Varèse Digital Playback System

In June 1971 an article appeared in Stereo Review about an iconoclastic French-born composer. It was titled “Edgard: the Idol of My Youth.” In it, Frank

www.theabsolutesound.com

is enthusiastic, but I am wondering if what the reviewer, Jacob Heilbrunn, says is not mostly applicable to other DACs, too. The claim that finally vinyl playback has been reached has been made many times before as well.

Let's start with the latter. Heilbrunn says:

Another attribute of the Varèse that shone on this and other recordings was its irreproachable imaging. Put bluntly, I have not previously heard various instruments reproduced with such unwavering fidelity. There was not even a hint of one instrument intruding upon another. Instead, on the Es-Dur label trumpet recording, the accompanying harpsichord and bassoon were locked into place. Another way of putting this is that the spatial relationships of the instruments rivaled what you would hear on a well-recorded LP.

[...]

Hitherto, digital playback, it must be said, has always suffered in comparison to LP in recreating the ambience of a musical venue, but the Varèse narrows, if not closes, the gap to a degree that may unsettle, even unnerve, enthusiasts of vinyl playback.

***

Apart from the fact that great imaging and ambient retrieval by DACs has been praised numerous times before, here is Dick Olsher in Stereophile on the Accuphase DP-90 CD transport/DP-91 DAC combo:

Accuphase DP-90 CD transport & DC-91 D/A processor Page 2 | Stereophile.com

The trumpet and harpsichord are two instruments that are often treated unkindly by CD players. On Kathleen Battle's and Wynton Marsalis's Baroque Duet (Sony Classical SK 46672), both Wynton's up-front trumpet and Anthony Newman's background harpsichord popped into space with immaculate timing...

www.stereophile.com

To my amazement, Cleo was resurrected in full glory. Palpable outlines, a vivid and dynamic portrayal of the harmonic envelope, tremendous bass definition, and a convincing ambient signature—it was all there.

Conclusion

At last! A digital front-end that I find competitive with a high-performance analog front-end. As you may know, my analog system (Basis Ovation turntable, Graham Engineering 1.5-T tonearm, and Symphonic Line RG-8 Gold cartridge) isn't exactly chopped liver. With the phono preamplifier, the grand total approaches $20k.

So it was fair, at least price-wise, to compare my analog rig to the Accuphase DP-90/DC-91 combination. In terms of spatial impression, image focus, dynamic bloom, timbral accuracy, textural liquidity, timing and rhythmic precision, and the innate ability to create a gestalt of the original musical event, the Accuphase duo held its own.

In the face of such mesmerizing performance, how could I possibly walk away from these components? I couldn't—I bought them. Absolute reference caliber, and a perfect 10 in my book.

***

Note: This review dates from 1995 ! That is THIRTY (30) years ago! And it's about plain ole' 16/44.1 Redbook CD playback.

So much for the "newness" of the claim that digital has finally reached vinyl playback.

***

Now on to other passages in Heibrunn's dCS Varese review:

The Varèse also demonstrated remarkable prowess at situating a solo piano, long one of the most difficult instruments to record, firmly in the concert hall without any blurring or smearing or hardening of the notes. On a recording of Valery Afanassiev playing Beethoven’s Moonlight sonata, I was struck by the lucidity of the playback. It was simplicity itself to discern the various musical lines, accented notes, and pedal work. The rhythmic surety of the Varèse is something that is never less than striking and a direct product of its interstitial silence. (End quote.)

Well, that's great, but as those words stand, I could say the very same about the performance of my Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC, a DAC that costs roughly 20 times (!!) less than the $ 300,000 Varese.

Another passage from the review:

Another outfit from the United Kingdom, the London Philharmonic on a nifty Decca recording of Benjamin Britten conducting his The Young Person’s Guide to the Orchestra and the Simple Symphony for Orchestra, also sounded superb on the Varèse. The reason is that the dCS unit doesn’t harden or get overwhelmed on an orchestral crescendo but instead maintains it composure. (End quote.)

The comment about the lack of hardening and keeping the composure on an orchestral crescendo also would apply precisely to my Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC.

NOTE: I am NOT saying that the Tambaqui DAC performs equally to the Varese. I am sure the Varese is the better DAC as it should be, given the vast price difference. What I do note is the problem of interchangeability between words reserved in this review of a SOTA top DAC and words that could be said about the much "lesser" (yet still excellent) Tambaqui DAC, or any other still excellent DAC that is more affordable.

So both in that sense and in terms of the aforementioned competitive comparison with analog that had been done many times before, even as early as 30 (!) years ago as I pointed out:

What does such a review of a top DAC even mean?

 

[microstrip]

(...) What does such a review of a top DAC even mean?

IMO almost nothing unless we have followed Jacob Heilbrunn reviews and audiophile path along the years and are experienced audiophiles. But surely very entertaining and we usually learn a few interesting side things from his reviews.

I have followed him for about 20 years, read about his systems and build of his listening room, as well as the opinions of other reviewers about his system. I have owned and listened to a lot of gear he reviewed in the past, I could confront his reviews with my evaluation.

Surely preference plays a major role in this subject. If you have a very different preference and experience from his, don't expect to understand what he addresses many times.

BTW, for me it just reinforced my desire to listen to the dCS Varese.

 

[Al M.]

IMO almost nothing unless we have followed Jacob Heilbrunn reviews and audiophile path along the years and are experienced audiophiles. But surely very entertaining and we usually learn a few interesting side things from his reviews.

I have followed him for about 20 years, read about his systems and build of his listening room, as well as the opinions of other reviewers about his system. I have owned and listened to a lot of gear he reviewed in the past, I could confront his reviews with my evaluation.

Surely preference plays a major role in this subject. If you have a very different preference and experience from his, don't expect to understand what he addresses many times.

BTW, for me it just reinforced my desire to listen to the dCS Varese.

Oh, I think I understand very well what he addresses. He uses words and concepts that I can perfectly relate to. As I pointed out, the problem is that in many instances in this review they do not necessarily apply specifically to the Varese, but to any quite excellent digital.

His concluding paragraph, however, points to something really special:

Overall, the ability of the Varèse to produce a majestic and imperturbable soundstage was unparalleled in my experience, close, on some orchestral recordings, to the real thing, at least in terms of visceral force and ambience and tonal accuracy. To further move away from strict audiophile terms for a moment, there is an overwhelming generosity to the sound, a warmth, richness and refinement that banish quotidian cares and carry you away into a higher musical realm. Quantum leap, indeed.

 

[Kofi Baffour]

The new dCS Varese review in The Absolute Sound,

dCS Varèse Digital Playback System

In June 1971 an article appeared in Stereo Review about an iconoclastic French-born composer. It was titled “Edgard: the Idol of My Youth.” In it, Frank

www.theabsolutesound.com

is enthusiastic, but I am wondering if what the reviewer, Jacob Heilbrunn, says is not mostly applicable to other DACs, too. The claim that finally vinyl playback has been reached has been made many times before as well.

Let's start with the latter. Heilbrunn says:

Another attribute of the Varèse that shone on this and other recordings was its irreproachable imaging. Put bluntly, I have not previously heard various instruments reproduced with such unwavering fidelity. There was not even a hint of one instrument intruding upon another. Instead, on the Es-Dur label trumpet recording, the accompanying harpsichord and bassoon were locked into place. Another way of putting this is that the spatial relationships of the instruments rivaled what you would hear on a well-recorded LP.

[...]

Hitherto, digital playback, it must be said, has always suffered in comparison to LP in recreating the ambience of a musical venue, but the Varèse narrows, if not closes, the gap to a degree that may unsettle, even unnerve, enthusiasts of vinyl playback.

***

Apart from the fact that great imaging and ambient retrieval by DACs has been praised numerous times before, here is Dick Olsher in Stereophile on the Accuphase DP-90 CD transport/DP-91 DAC combo:

Accuphase DP-90 CD transport & DC-91 D/A processor Page 2 | Stereophile.com

The trumpet and harpsichord are two instruments that are often treated unkindly by CD players. On Kathleen Battle's and Wynton Marsalis's Baroque Duet (Sony Classical SK 46672), both Wynton's up-front trumpet and Anthony Newman's background harpsichord popped into space with immaculate timing...

www.stereophile.com

To my amazement, Cleo was resurrected in full glory. Palpable outlines, a vivid and dynamic portrayal of the harmonic envelope, tremendous bass definition, and a convincing ambient signature—it was all there.

Conclusion

At last! A digital front-end that I find competitive with a high-performance analog front-end. As you may know, my analog system (Basis Ovation turntable, Graham Engineering 1.5-T tonearm, and Symphonic Line RG-8 Gold cartridge) isn't exactly chopped liver. With the phono preamplifier, the grand total approaches $20k.

So it was fair, at least price-wise, to compare my analog rig to the Accuphase DP-90/DC-91 combination. In terms of spatial impression, image focus, dynamic bloom, timbral accuracy, textural liquidity, timing and rhythmic precision, and the innate ability to create a gestalt of the original musical event, the Accuphase duo held its own.

In the face of such mesmerizing performance, how could I possibly walk away from these components? I couldn't—I bought them. Absolute reference caliber, and a perfect 10 in my book.

***

Note: This review dates from 1995 ! That is THIRTY (30) years ago! And it's about plain ole' 16/44.1 Redbook CD playback.

So much for the "newness" of the claim that digital has finally reached vinyl playback.

***

Now on to other passages in Heibrunn's dCS Varese review:

The Varèse also demonstrated remarkable prowess at situating a solo piano, long one of the most difficult instruments to record, firmly in the concert hall without any blurring or smearing or hardening of the notes. On a recording of Valery Afanassiev playing Beethoven’s Moonlight sonata, I was struck by the lucidity of the playback. It was simplicity itself to discern the various musical lines, accented notes, and pedal work. The rhythmic surety of the Varèse is something that is never less than striking and a direct product of its interstitial silence. (End quote.)

Well, that's great, but as those words stand, I could say the very same about the performance of my Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC, a DAC that costs roughly 20 times (!!) less than the $ 300,000 Varese.

Another passage from the review:

Another outfit from the United Kingdom, the London Philharmonic on a nifty Decca recording of Benjamin Britten conducting his The Young Person’s Guide to the Orchestra and the Simple Symphony for Orchestra, also sounded superb on the Varèse. The reason is that the dCS unit doesn’t harden or get overwhelmed on an orchestral crescendo but instead maintains it composure. (End quote.)

The comment about the lack of hardening and keeping the composure on an orchestral crescendo also would apply precisely to my Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC.

NOTE: I am NOT saying that the Tambaqui DAC performs equally to the Varese. I am sure the Varese is the better DAC as it should be, given the vast price difference. What I do note is the problem of interchangeability between words reserved in this review of a SOTA top DAC and words that could be said about the much "lesser" (yet still excellent) Tambaqui DAC, or any other still excellent DAC that is more affordable.

So both in that sense and in terms of the aforementioned competitive comparison with analog that had been done many times before, even as early as 30 (!) years ago as I pointed out:

What does such a review of a top DAC even mean?

you know what it means lol. We've been at the endgame for a long time now. My thing is if you're spending to feel good about something, that is fine but let us not put forth untruths about hearing things. And that is why I do not take reviews of DACs serious in 2025

And also matching vinyl is funny cos digital is superior to vinyl in every metric when it comes to actual fidelity. Vinyl has its place as a nostalgia baiting and sometimes better mastering practices that is so because the medium in inherently handicapped and can't be brute forced like digital can.
Redbook was when Digital passed analog but that isn't the point here regardless of how I feel about that statement

 

[Mike Lavigne]

IMO almost nothing unless we have followed Jacob Heilbrunn reviews and audiophile path along the years and are experienced audiophiles. But surely very entertaining and we usually learn a few interesting side things from his reviews.

I have followed him for about 20 years, read about his systems and build of his listening room, as well as the opinions of other reviewers about his system. I have owned and listened to a lot of gear he reviewed in the past, I could confront his reviews with my evaluation.

Surely preference plays a major role in this subject. If you have a very different preference and experience from his, don't expect to understand what he addresses many times.

BTW, for me it just reinforced my desire to listen to the dCS Varese.

Jacob called me last week (known him for around 25 years) and we talked for 30 minutes. it was not about the Varese but it did come up and he does like it a lot. his reviews do use big words and i need my thesaurus to read/understand them.

 

[Republicoftexas69]

The new dCS Varese review in The Absolute Sound,

dCS Varèse Digital Playback System

In June 1971 an article appeared in Stereo Review about an iconoclastic French-born composer. It was titled “Edgard: the Idol of My Youth.” In it, Frank

www.theabsolutesound.com

is enthusiastic, but I am wondering if what the reviewer, Jacob Heilbrunn, says is not mostly applicable to other DACs, too. The claim that finally vinyl playback has been reached has been made many times before as well.

Let's start with the latter. Heilbrunn says:

Another attribute of the Varèse that shone on this and other recordings was its irreproachable imaging. Put bluntly, I have not previously heard various instruments reproduced with such unwavering fidelity. There was not even a hint of one instrument intruding upon another. Instead, on the Es-Dur label trumpet recording, the accompanying harpsichord and bassoon were locked into place. Another way of putting this is that the spatial relationships of the instruments rivaled what you would hear on a well-recorded LP.

[...]

Hitherto, digital playback, it must be said, has always suffered in comparison to LP in recreating the ambience of a musical venue, but the Varèse narrows, if not closes, the gap to a degree that may unsettle, even unnerve, enthusiasts of vinyl playback.

***

Apart from the fact that great imaging and ambient retrieval by DACs has been praised numerous times before, here is Dick Olsher in Stereophile on the Accuphase DP-90 CD transport/DP-91 DAC combo:

Accuphase DP-90 CD transport & DC-91 D/A processor Page 2 | Stereophile.com

The trumpet and harpsichord are two instruments that are often treated unkindly by CD players. On Kathleen Battle's and Wynton Marsalis's Baroque Duet (Sony Classical SK 46672), both Wynton's up-front trumpet and Anthony Newman's background harpsichord popped into space with immaculate timing...

www.stereophile.com

To my amazement, Cleo was resurrected in full glory. Palpable outlines, a vivid and dynamic portrayal of the harmonic envelope, tremendous bass definition, and a convincing ambient signature—it was all there.

Conclusion

At last! A digital front-end that I find competitive with a high-performance analog front-end. As you may know, my analog system (Basis Ovation turntable, Graham Engineering 1.5-T tonearm, and Symphonic Line RG-8 Gold cartridge) isn't exactly chopped liver. With the phono preamplifier, the grand total approaches $20k.

So it was fair, at least price-wise, to compare my analog rig to the Accuphase DP-90/DC-91 combination. In terms of spatial impression, image focus, dynamic bloom, timbral accuracy, textural liquidity, timing and rhythmic precision, and the innate ability to create a gestalt of the original musical event, the Accuphase duo held its own.

In the face of such mesmerizing performance, how could I possibly walk away from these components? I couldn't—I bought them. Absolute reference caliber, and a perfect 10 in my book.

***

Note: This review dates from 1995 ! That is THIRTY (30) years ago! And it's about plain ole' 16/44.1 Redbook CD playback.

So much for the "newness" of the claim that digital has finally reached vinyl playback.

***

Now on to other passages in Heibrunn's dCS Varese review:

The Varèse also demonstrated remarkable prowess at situating a solo piano, long one of the most difficult instruments to record, firmly in the concert hall without any blurring or smearing or hardening of the notes. On a recording of Valery Afanassiev playing Beethoven’s Moonlight sonata, I was struck by the lucidity of the playback. It was simplicity itself to discern the various musical lines, accented notes, and pedal work. The rhythmic surety of the Varèse is something that is never less than striking and a direct product of its interstitial silence. (End quote.)

Well, that's great, but as those words stand, I could say the very same about the performance of my Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC, a DAC that costs roughly 20 times (!!) less than the $ 300,000 Varese.

Another passage from the review:

Another outfit from the United Kingdom, the London Philharmonic on a nifty Decca recording of Benjamin Britten conducting his The Young Person’s Guide to the Orchestra and the Simple Symphony for Orchestra, also sounded superb on the Varèse. The reason is that the dCS unit doesn’t harden or get overwhelmed on an orchestral crescendo but instead maintains it composure. (End quote.)

The comment about the lack of hardening and keeping the composure on an orchestral crescendo also would apply precisely to my Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC.

NOTE: I am NOT saying that the Tambaqui DAC performs equally to the Varese. I am sure the Varese is the better DAC as it should be, given the vast price difference. What I do note is the problem of interchangeability between words reserved in this review of a SOTA top DAC and words that could be said about the much "lesser" (yet still excellent) Tambaqui DAC, or any other still excellent DAC that is more affordable.

So both in that sense and in terms of the aforementioned competitive comparison with analog that had been done many times before, even as early as 30 (!) years ago as I pointed out:

What does such a review of a top DAC even mean?

IYO

 

[Mike Lavigne]

how can an uber dac review separate itself, become more than a casual data point, and deliver meaningful info we can take seriously enough to investigate for ourselves?

does the reviewer have the experience, system and references to support his perspective? are we familiar enough with this reviewer's other work to put sufficient weight on his opinions? how much effort was put into investigations of the various performance attributes?

has this reviewer had other brand heavy hitting dac's in his system to bring perspective?

until i heard the Wadax at my dealer i was not serious about considering it. it was just this thing out there i knew about, and initially i was turned off by the look. then hearing it got my full attention as the year before i had heard the CH Precision 7 box Mono Dac in the same room and system and been impressed. and this was a whole different level of beast. and i loved the look in person. so the reviews only got my true attention after actually hearing the Wadax in a proper room. then i read and re-read those reviews and understood the hyperbole. so in my case, the reviews were no call to action. i had to hear it first. and then hear it in my own system compared to my own MSB dac and Taiko Extreme Server before i wrote the check.

as far as the review words applying to any dac, that is true for 100% of all reviews and 100% of all posts about all gear......mostly. it's all subjective and not science. and never will be. if we decide to be skeptical and rain on parades, who can argue? it's just opinions. it's just that with huge dollars there is such a temptation to be downers. it's the default human (smug audiophile) condition. takes courage to overcome it. how can one dac sound that much better than another? answer = fill in the blank. we can claim common sense. but that is all relative to our situation. just like watches, or Ferrari's, or boats, or planes. yet those don't bring on the negativity that uber hifi does. for whatever societal reason.

 

[Al M.]

as far as the review words applying to any dac, that is true for 100% of all reviews and 100% of all posts about all gear......mostly. it's all subjective and not science. and never will be. if we decide to be skeptical and rain on parades, who can argue? it's just opinions. it's just that with huge dollars there is such a temptation to be downers. it's the default human (smug audiophile) condition. takes courage to overcome it. how can one dac sound that much better than another? answer = fill in the blank. we can claim common sense. but that is all relative to our situation. just like watches, or Ferrari's, or boats, or planes. yet those don't bring on the negativity that uber hifi does. for whatever societal reason.

I can easily accept that a DAC like the Varese (or similar high-priced DACs) sets new standards. I am not a downer in that sense. Just like I am not a downer in the sense of accepting that the Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC squarely beat my Yggdrasil LIM DAC in lack of digital noise and resulting naturalness and purity of tone. Before trying it, I could have had the attitude that the Tambaqui DAC cannot be worth the money (by normal, non-WBF standards it is outrageously expensive too) but I didn't *). I heard the result and bought one.

What I am skeptical about is the appropriateness of the language in reviews of uber DACs, not just this one.

____________________

*) I did hear other, very expensive DACs before and thought they were not worth the money, but that is a different story.

 

[Rexp]

I can easily accept that a DAC like the Varese (or similar high-priced DACs) sets new standards. I am not a downer in that sense. Just like I am not a downer in the sense of accepting that the Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC squarely beat my Yggdrasil LIM DAC in lack of digital noise and resulting naturalness and purity of tone. Before trying it, I could have had the attitude that the Tambaqui DAC cannot be worth the money (by normal, non-WBF standards it is outrageously expensive too) but I didn't *). I heard the result and bought one.

What I am skeptical about is the appropriateness of the language in reviews of uber DACs, not just this one.

____________________

*) I did hear other, very expensive DACs before and thought they were not worth the money, but that is a different story.

Agreed, the question is how many of these reviewers that have used the 'digital now matches my vinyl' line have been lying through their teeth in order to sell gear. Best to ignore reviews, can anyone name a reviewer they trust?

 

[Mike Lavigne]

Agreed, the question is how many of these reviewers that have used the 'digital now matches my vinyl' line have been lying through their teeth in order to sell gear. Best to ignore reviews, can anyone name a reviewer they trust?

i think there are many factors that go into how valuable any review or even forum post might be assuming one is sufficiently interested in the product category to have an actual interest. but it's not a right or wrong thing. there are degrees.

define trust. or maybe level of trust. not saying that the below levels of trust cover it all. but it's something like this.

high level

1-blindly purchase gear sight unseen based on their reviews. over time determined this reviewer hears what i hear. i understand him.
2-seriously investigate gear based on their review.
3-seriiously investigate or even buy a narrow particular category of gear based on their review. had previous positive experiences.

medium level.

4-pay close attention to gear they review if you have the chance. worth more consideration.
5-decent data point to file away.

low or no level.

6-not sure there is much value to their reviews, the reviewer has little apparent experience with this type/level of gear.
7-entertainment purposes only. enjoy reading well written reviews.
8-can't be bothered to read.

for myself, there are a few that do rate #3 in my book and i have pulled the trigger a few times. particularly on phono cartridges. it's so hard to audition them. even turntables under particular circumstances. these are narrow categories of products where trust can be very high. i have blindly purchased this category of gear based solely on a Michael Fremer review (and direct communications) a few times over the years....and so far 100% satisfied with those products.

for digital; medium reviewer trust levels only. for the last 10 years or so i only high level trust my own ears. and my own system with my own references, at the highest level. i bought my MSB 'used' after hearing it three times at shows (there were zero MSB Select II reviews to read). the Wadax after an extended home audition. the original Taiko SGM Server i bought was brought to me for extended audition before i bought it. i did upgrade to the Extreme unheard after that.

i do see quite a bit of #6. where the review might be sincere and well written, but the gear is out of the league of the reviewer. so not much relative usable value....but 'A' for effort. might be spot on, but can't reasonably give it much weight.

 

[Ron Resnick]

What does such a review of a top DAC even mean?

It certainly helps to have read a particular reviewer's reviews for a long period of time to understand the person's subjective sonic preferences; to be able to triangulate those preferences with your own preferences; to understand where he/she is coming from and to understand the review; and, critically, to be able to read between the lines.

Isn't almost every review really just a few specific sonic comments wrapped up in a lot of marketing and technical background information, prior listening experiences and music-based examples -- all of which serve to explain and to justify the few specific sonic comments remaining after distillation?

Over time one learns how to burn away the infomercial aspects, the background discussion, the hyperbole and the music examples to distill the few specific sonic comments.

Back to Jacob's review, I would consider these to be the most salient and specific sonic comments:

The Varèse sounded more panoramic and detailed and smoother than the Vivaldi, . . .

Here Jacob confirms why I personally preferred the Varese over the Apex (smoother, less forensic).

If you like a slightly cooler, slightly more analytical sound, this review helps you decide in favor of the Vivaldi Apex. If you like a slightly smoother, less forensic presentation, this review helps you decide in favor of the Varese.

This is the specific use to which the review may rationally be put.

 

[Al M.]

Agreed, the question is how many of these reviewers that have used the 'digital now matches my vinyl' line have been lying through their teeth in order to sell gear. Best to ignore reviews, can anyone name a reviewer they trust?

I do find Dick Olsher's 30--year old review of the Accuphase CD transport/DAC combo, which I cited, far more credible when it comes to making a comparison with high-level LP playback.

He does so on the basis of low-level linearity, which back then apparently received a breakthrough with the Accuphase combo, and is quite specific about explaining its effects. If he is too one-sided and rosy about his assessment of the Accuphase vs his LP playback, that I cannot judge. Yet he clearly provides solid reasons for his assessment.

 

[Ron Resnick]

can anyone name a reviewer they trust?

Of course. (If you cannot find a singular reviewer in this entire industry whom you trust, then the problem lies somewhere other than with the reviewers.)

 

[Rexp]

Of course. (If you cannot find a singular reviewer in this entire industry whom you trust, then the problem lies somewhere other than with the reviewers.)

Who do you trust?

 

[Rushton]

Interesting conversation, and well out of my league.

I occasionally write up my impressions of some equipment I've purchased for my personal audio system (Walker Proscenium Turntable and Aesthetix Io Eclipse phono stage way back when, and more recently the Playback Designs MPD-8 DAC and the HeadAmp Blue Hawaii electrostatic headphones amplifier). But, without being able to make a direct comparison, in my own system, of one piece of gear to another, my reviews are useless as purchasing guides.

And they're not intended to be. At most, I can share my enthusiasm and attempt to describe what I hear and what I like about what I'm hearing. At best, my enthusiasm might warrant someone adding it to their list of candidates to audition should the opportunity arise -- but NEVER make a purchasing decision on my (or any other writer's) article.

 

[Iamrael]

but NEVER make a purchasing decision on my (or any other writers) article.

I understand that this is just your opinion but do/can you differentiate between any writer and a reviewer?
Do you apply this same principle to buying a refrigerator or say a garage door opener?

 

[Rushton]

In over 50 years of involvement with the best audio I can afford to assemble, I have yet to purchase any piece of gear I've not been able to listen to before making the purchase commitment. I only began writing some reviews after retirement. Until then, I was just an audiophile who enjoyed music and sharing with friends.

Audio has too much of a subjective component to trust any significant purchase to the opinion of someone else, whether friend, writer or reviewer. We all have our own listening biases and priorities. These determine what we hear and what we end up valuing.

Yes, if you've followed some writers long enough, and sampled the equipment that writer has described, so that you have high confidence that their listening priorities align with your own, then perhaps it is possible to make the leap of faith. I never got to that point with any of the various writers whose articles I followed.

Would they cause me to add something to my "short list?" Oh yes. But that was where it remained until I could hear it for myself in some fashion. Preferably in a system where I felt I had a good handle on the sonic characteristics of the rest of that system. This is particularly hard to accomplish today with the loss of so many retail audio stores, perhaps even impossible.

I understand that this is just your opinion but do/can you differentiate between any writer and a reviewer?

And to this specific question, it does perhaps make sense to differentiate between a writer and a reviewer. I'm clearly a "writer." In my mind, anyone professing to be a reviewer needs to be able to compare, in their own listening room, equipment from different manufacturers. And they need to have built up some experience identifying and being able to articulate the differences in sound that they hear. But, even then, audio memories are notoriously short-lived. To have heard a piece of gear a year ago and then attempt to compare it to some new piece of gear today, is fraught with potential errors of recall. The better reviewers, in my experience, maintain a stable reference system and rotate one piece of new equipment into that stable reference system at a time. Then, their comparison is always to what this new piece of equipment sounds like relative to the reference system -- not the piece of gear from a year ago unless they can bring that same piece of gear back again.

As you say -- just my opinion. Just based on my experience going back quite a ways. YMMV.

 

[gleeds]

It certainly helps to have read a particular reviewer's reviews for a long period of time to understand the person's subjective sonic preferences; to be able to triangulate those preferences with your own preferences; to understand where he/she is coming from and to understand the review; and, critically, to be able to read between the lines.

Isn't almost every review really just a few specific sonic comments wrapped up in a lot of marketing and technical background information, prior listening experiences and music-based examples -- all of which serve to explain and to justify the few specific sonic comments remaining after distillation?

Over time one learns how to burn away the infomercial aspects, the background discussion, the hyperbole and the music examples to distill the few specific sonic comments.

Back to Jacob's review, I would consider these to be the most salient and specific sonic comments:

The Varèse sounded more panoramic and detailed and smoother than the Vivaldi, . . .

Here Jacob confirms why I personally preferred the Varese over the Apex (smoother, less forensic).

If you like a slightly cooler, slightly more analytical sound, this review helps you decide in favor of the Vivaldi Apex. If you like a slightly smoother, less forensic presentation, this review helps you decide in favor of the Varese.

This is the specific use to which the review may rationally be put.

Ron, I keep coming back to the question of who in their right mind would purchase a $216,000 source without a thorough listen, and even further, do so in the context of their system?

 

[DasguteOhr]

I do find Dick Olsher's 30--year old review of the Accuphase CD transport/DAC combo, which I cited, far more credible when it comes to making a comparison with high-level LP playback.

He does so on the basis of low-level linearity, which back then apparently received a breakthrough with the Accuphase combo, and is quite specific about explaining its effects. If he is too one-sided and rosy about his assessment of the Accuphase vs his LP playback, that I cannot judge. Yet he clearly provides solid reasons for his assessment.

Accuphase Ingeniers must be crazy people. They made a joke out of this thing being so artifact-free that a German test magazine ordered a second audio analyzer because they thought the first one was broken because they couldn't find any interference. The thing has 16 DAC chips per channel. From my own experience, I can say the DAC also processes 24-bit signals without any problems. There are DACs that reproduce music more emotionally, but even today, more resolution is difficult. The workmanship is at a level that I would call exceptional. The accompanying CD transport is the best I've ever seen.

 

[microstrip]

(...) If you like a slightly cooler, slightly more analytical sound, this review helps you decide in favor of the Vivaldi Apex. If you like a slightly smoother, less forensic presentation, this review helps you decide in favor of the Varese.

The danger of ignoring most of the long review of the dCS Varese, ignoring the Jacob Heilbrunn previous reviews of the dCS Vivaldi and Vivaldi Apex and focusing in a single isolated incomplete sentence - a biased and wrong advice IMO. Anyone wanting "a cooler sound , slightly more analytic sound" can get a Varese and get such sound just choosing the appropriate pieces and have much better "cooler sound , slightly more analytic sound".

Fortunately, for knowledgeable audiophiles reviews are more useful than for those sticking to immediate compare comments before the system was even warm ...

This is the specific use to which the review may rationally be put.

Probably, but fortunately it seems the great majority of the audiophiles are not rationale according to your standards.